I think our chances for success on the Iraq War funding supplemental are actually pretty good. I come to that conclusion from thinking about Bush's options, and his character.
Bush actually has three options on the funding supplemental. He can sign the bill, veto the bill, or just not sign the bill. How do these options stack up for him.
He has been claiming for weeks now that he will veto the bill, but it is also getting clearer and clearer that that option is not very attractive to him. Recent poll resultsindicate that about the same number of people (a bit more actually) favor the Democrats on this issue as compared to the President. His support on this, and everything else, has only been eroding. The purgegate scandal is hurting him, and Gonzales's testimony before Congress next week will only give support to the Democrats and hurt the President. His recent invitation to the Democratic leadership to come meet with him so he can tell them what he wants them to do is as clear a sign as your going to get that the White House is getting desperate. If the Administration was sure that the veto was a winning move for them, they would never have made the offer, meager as it was. My guess is that Bush will go with this choice, but he doesn't believe that it will win for him, we just need to keep the Democrats in Congress believing the same thing. So far it is going well, we need to keep it up.
If Bush can't stomach the veto, he could sign the bill. Needless to say, that is not something he is willing to do. Giving his ok to withdraw dates would stick in his craw. (He could try the signing statement route, but he no longer has the muscle in Congress to try and pull that off. It would also require a fight down the road when he will be much weaker than he is now.)
Finally, he could just not sign the bill. It would become law anyway, after ten days. This option is, to me, the most interesting. If Bush were a man of any character at all, this would be the best option. If what he claimed about Iraq was true (or even if he really believed it) and he was a man actually capable of accomplishing anything he could refuse to sign and see the bill become law. Then he could use the time and money to actually make progress in Iraq (I know, I know, but recall I started off on a counterfactual path a while back) and then go back to Congress again to get the timeline lifted. My point is not that this is realistic, it is not, but that this would be an option for a man of character and ability. Bush is neither.
The last option also has the problem for Bush that it would involve letting a bill become law without his signature. The President's signature is not needed for a bill to become law, but Bush has gone to great lengths to obscure this fact in order to promote his fantasy of a unitary executive and his own importance. His petulance would not allow him to have this bill become law without his signature.
So, in conclusion, Bush's options stink. He is in a corner. The veto is still the most likely option, but no option is any good for him. The Democrats are now in the position of strength. As long as they don't start to forget that, we can win this fight.